4K GPU?

[Edward78]

Is it the amount of ram I have preventing me from being able to do 4K, like a 12 Gig GPU would it do it for games?

[Recharged]

Best entry point for 4K and a solid experience that will last for a while is a 7900 XT.

[Hinjima]

3 minutes ago, Edward78 said:

Is it the amount of ram I have preventing me from being able to do 4K, like a 12 Gig GPU would it do it for games?

Its not only VRAM that makes a difference but the power of the GPU itself.  If a RTX 1070 would have 40GB of VRAM it would still not be able to do 4k.

[Stahlmann]

The GPU itself is the main limiting factor. VRAM only makes a difference if you don't have enough. For 4K gaming i'd recommend to shop for 12GB and more. But in terms of raw performance, basically go as high as you can with your budget because on 4K you will still be GPU limited even with a 4090.

[podkall]

6 minutes ago, Hinjima said:

Its not only VRAM that makes a difference but the power of the GPU itself.  If a RTX 1070 would have 40GB of VRAM it would still not be able to do 4k.

depends on game too, but most likely would need all settings low for playable framerate

[Edward78]

If the drivers would mature faster from Intel, a card from them looks good the price for one is a whole lot better.

[JonS77]

it's a combination of processing power, bus width, and then video memory capacity. a 7800xt for example has 16gb of vram, but it doesn't really have the processing power for 4k. The 4070 has the processing power if you consider DLSS, but doesn't have the bus width. But then there are other factors like, are we talking about 4K with RT off and do we want proper upscaling for higher +60fps?

 

the only no-compromise 4K 60-120fps cards from the current generations are in my opinion the 4080 and the 4090. Everything else comes with some sort of compromise.

 

But if you are willing to compromise and drop settings for a more console like experience, many cards can be considered 4K.

[Recharged]

19 minutes ago, Jon-Slow said:

it's a combination of processing power, bus width, and then video memory capacity. a 7800xt for example has 16gb of vram, but it doesn't really have the processing power for 4k. The 4070 has the processing power if you consider DLSS, but doesn't have the bus width. But then there are other factors like, are we talking about 4K with RT off and do we want proper upscaling for higher +60fps?

 

the only no-compromise 4K 60-120fps cards from the current generations are in my opinion the 4080 and the 4090. Everything else comes with some sort of compromise.

 

But if you are willing to compromise and drop settings for a more console like experience, many cards can be considered 4K.

You will be compromising with the 4080 and 4090 also.

 

 

[GuiltySpark_]

30 minutes ago, Edward78 said:

If the drivers would mature faster from Intel, a card from them looks good the price for one is a whole lot better.

Nothing they currently make is suitable for 4K gaming, really.

[JonS77]

8 hours ago, Recharged said:

You will be compromising with the 4080 and 4090 also.

 

 

This is a UE5 video but seems like the best experience you can have, with the 4080 specially with DLSS+FG for optimized games. I don't see your point.

[starsmine]

9 hours ago, Edward78 said:

Is it the amount of ram I have preventing me from being able to do 4K, like a 12 Gig GPU would it do it for games?

Its going to depend on your game suite. I regularly play tons games older titles at 4k with zero issues with a 3060 12gb, and even the rare newer title I'm able to with DLSS like RE4R. 

For the newest titles that came out in 2023, a 6800XT/7800 XT is a great entry point, and for Nvidia, the 4070 is fine, but I I'm not sold on how well it will perform in new titles in 3 years compared to the AMD parts with more ram. 

 

  

14 minutes ago, Jon-Slow said:

This is a UE5 video but seems like the best experience you can have, with the 4080 specially with DLSS+FG for optimized games. I don't see your point.

FG gives you visual frames at the cost of significant input latency so it feels like playing at a lower frame rate than if you had it off. The best experience will be with FG off. DLSS helps still. 

 

[Bagzie]

9 hours ago, Jon-Slow said:

it's a combination of processing power, bus width, and then video memory capacity. a 7800xt for example has 16gb of vram, but it doesn't really have the processing power for 4k. The 4070 has the processing power if you consider DLSS, but doesn't have the bus width. But then there are other factors like, are we talking about 4K with RT off and do we want proper upscaling for higher +60fps?

 

the only no-compromise 4K 60-120fps cards from the current generations are in my opinion the 4080 and the 4090. Everything else comes with some sort of compromise.

 

But if you are willing to compromise and drop settings for a more console like experience, many cards can be considered 4K.

Save the fanboy stuff for somewhere else.

 

Saying proper upscaler then ruling out the 7900XTX is showing your tribalism.

[JonS77]

7 minutes ago, Bagzie said:

Save the fanboy stuff for somewhere else.

 

That seems a little personal, I'm not going around calling you a fanboy for your opinions. It's a little strange to be honest, I would reconsider my toxic behaviour.

 

7 minutes ago, Bagzie said:

Saying proper upscaler then ruling out the 7900XTX is showing your tribalism.

 

The 7900XTX has too many compromises, your only option is either TAA, MSAA, or god help me FSR. MSAA is good but at the cost of a lot of performance. The 4080/4090 have DLSS, DLAA, and DLDSR. The frame gen tech for the 7900XTX forces FSR's upscaler on you which makes it pretty pointless if you like your image quality, but you can use DLSSFG with or without any upscaler or AA method you like. DLSS itself has more temporal stability in performance mode than FSR has in quality mode, this one could be personal but I think it matters for high refereshrate gaming.

 

And of course there is the RT performance after that, in the last 2 big AAA games where base RT cannot be disabled in any settings Avatar FOP, and Alan Wake 2, the 7900XTX does not hit 40fps and 60fps respectively at native 4K. So you have to use upscaling, and FG if you can stand it. I could play both of those games with DLSS and DLSSFG at 80-100fps on my LG C2. I can't do that with the 7900XTX FSR, Not even with these 2 last modern releases, I couldn't do it with games that came out earlier this year and last year when I still had that card in my PC.

 

So if you're talking about 7900XTX for 4K in old games, or graphically light games, or if you don't care about AA quality and shimmers, then god bless you. But for modern games, sub 60fps 4K isn't cutting it for me on a 48" OLED.

[freeagent]

27 minutes ago, Bagzie said:

Saying proper upscaler then ruling out the 7900XTX is showing your tribalism.

You say it like its a bad thing. Seems like he does not want AMD.. perfectly ok.

[JonS77]

53 minutes ago, starsmine said:

FG gives you visual frames at the cost of significant input latency so it feels like playing at a lower frame rate than if you had it off. The best experience will be with FG off. DLSS helps still. 

I think it comes down to personal pereference and the screen you play it on as well as the type of game we're talking about. I've recently played through half of Robocop Rouge City with DLSSFG( Intend to finish it but don't have time) and a few hourse of the new Avatar game, and played through all of Alan Wake 2. I would say that once I'm hitting above 80fps on an OLED screen with those OLED pixle response times, I can no longer really tell I'm using frame gen.

 

 

 

[Bagzie]

54 minutes ago, freeagent said:

You say it like its a bad thing. Seems like he does not want AMD.. perfectly ok.

 

58 minutes ago, Jon-Slow said:

 

That seems a little personal, I'm not going around calling you a fanboy for your opinions. It's a little strange to be honest, I would reconsider my toxic behaviour.

 

 

The 7900XTX has too many compromises, your only option is either TAA, MSAA, or god help me FSR. MSAA is good but at the cost of a lot of performance. The 4080/4090 have DLSS, DLAA, and DLDSR. The frame gen tech for the 7900XTX forces FSR's upscaler on you which makes it pretty pointless if you like your image quality, but you can use DLSSFG with or without any upscaler or AA method you like. DLSS itself has more temporal stability in performance mode than FSR has in quality mode, this one could be personal but I think it matters for high refereshrate gaming.

 

And of course there is the RT performance after that, in the last 2 big AAA games where base RT cannot be disabled in any settings Avatar FOP, and Alan Wake 2, the 7900XTX does not hit 40fps and 60fps respectively at native 4K. So you have to use upscaling, and FG if you can stand it. I could play both of those games with DLSS and DLSSFG at 80-100fps on my LG C2. I can't do that with the 7900XTX FSR, Not even with these 2 last modern releases, I couldn't do it with games that came out earlier this year and last year when I still had that card in my PC.

 

So if you're talking about 7900XTX for 4K in old games, or graphically light games, or if you don't care about AA quality and shimmers, then god bless you. But for modern games, sub 60fps 4K isn't cutting it for me on a 48" OLED.

Yes the 7900XTX must be a 1440p card because you said so.

 

Definitely can't run any modern triple A titles at 4k...

 

OP should run out an pay 20-30% more for a 4080 and then he won't be limited to Cs go....

 

By the way Avatar fsr at ultra quality is just native with some sharpening so saying you need to use the upscaling component is just not true.

 

Also just because you had a subtle dig at AMD doesn't mean it's any less of a dig , Both amd and nvidia have there place as suitable options the difference is I've recommended nvidia in the past but you definately have that green blood running through your veins.

 

 

 

[JonS77]

3 minutes ago, Bagzie said:

Yes the 7900XTX must be a 1440p card because you said so.

 

Definitely can't run any modern triple A titles at 4k...

 

OP should run out an pay 20-30% more for a 4080 and then he won't be limited to Cs go....

This is so werid.

[Bagzie]

1 minute ago, Jon-Slow said:

This is so werid.

Nothing "werid" about it I just hate tribalism especially when it's used to give advice to people.

 

Anyways hope you enjoy your "rouge" city.

[JonS77]

36 minutes ago, Bagzie said:

Nothing "werid" about it I just hate tribalism especially when it's used to give advice to people.

 

 

So your response to everything I brought up about FSR being subjectively bad, the XTX card not hitting 40fps and 60fps in 2 newly released games while the 4080/90 can give you a +60fps experience in both games while having temporal stability is to call it tribalism. Seems like everyone here is speaking their minds but only one person got up on their horse and put on an armor to only post a comment defending their favourite mega corp and that's not me. Plus you've put way too many words in my mouth. You could've just said FSR looks good to you and moved on, and let me have my opinion too. That's why this is so weird.

 

36 minutes ago, Bagzie said:

Anyways hope you enjoy your "rouge" city.

ANYWAY! You got me there, I did a typo. English is my third language and I did a typo. That means everything I have to say is wrong, you are very correct. Good job.

[starsmine]

46 minutes ago, Jon-Slow said:

 

So your response to everything I brought up about FSR being subjectively bad, the XTX card not hitting 40fps and 60fps in 2 newly released games while the 4080/90 can give you a +60fps experience in both games while having temporal stability is to call it tribalism. Seems like everyone here is speaking their minds but only one person got up in their horse and put on an armor to only post a comment defending their favourite mega corp and that's not me. Plus you've put way too many words in my mouth. You could've just said FSR looks good to you and moved on, and let me have my opinion too. That's why this is so weird.

 

ANYWAY! You got me there, I did a typo. English is my third language and I did a typo. That means everything I have to say is wrong, you are very correct. Good job.

FSR isnt bad, not sure where you get that information. 
The current itteration of FSR Super resolution looks no worse the DLSS super resolution
Both do AA at native and look nearly identical so hating on that was weird to. 

Saying FSR Frame gen forces FSR AA on is weird as hell to say. You should NEVER turn on frame gen without turning on super resolution because of the latency/playability hit. Fact is that should be soft-locked out on a driver level so only someone who intentionally wants to dick around with known bad setting combinations can force it FG without SR. If you want more FPS in a game you first turn on SR before FG as you lose far less visual and especially temporal fidelity with it, and you gain playability, not lose it. 

FG lowers visual quality, drops playability in all situations, and only raises visual frame rates. (so its great for MS flight sim). Honestly, by the time you get to the point of thinking of turning on FG, you are better off dropping out of ultra settings to high anyway because it will look the same and improve frame rate and playability. (this is for both DLSS and FSR, its the nature of FG)

Just dont spread FUD based off false information is all bagzie wants. 

like bruh 

Also I hate that AMD called it FSR, yes SR is the main feature of DLSS, but at least saying DLSS SR isn't as weird as saying FSR SR. When FSR doesn't even mean SR is on is also weird. (AA)

[JonS77]

43 minutes ago, starsmine said:

FSR isnt bad, not sure where you get that information. 
The current itteration of FSR Super resolution looks no worse the DLSS super resolution
Both do AA at native and look nearly identical so hating on that was weird to. 

Saying FSR Frame gen forces FSR AA on is weird as hell to say. You should NEVER turn on frame gen without turning on super resolution because of the latency/playability hit. Fact is that should be soft-locked out on a driver level so only someone who intentionally wants to dick around with known bad setting combinations can force it FG without SR. If you want more FPS in a game you first turn on SR before FG as you lose far less visual and especially temporal fidelity with it, and you gain playability, not lose it. 

FG lowers visual quality, drops playability in all situations, and only raises visual frame rates. (so its great for MS flight sim). Honestly, by the time you get to the point of thinking of turning on FG, you are better off dropping out of ultra settings to high anyway because it will look the same and improve frame rate and playability. (this is for both DLSS and FSR, its the nature of FG)

Just dont spread FUD based off false information is all bagzie wants. 

like bruh 

Also I hate that AMD called it FSR, yes SR is the main feature of DLSS, but at least saying DLSS SR isn't as weird as saying FSR SR. When FSR doesn't even mean SR is on is also weird. (AA)

I don't think you can judge upscaling and AA quality by relying on image screenshots or even compressed videos, I feel like we've stablished that a long time ago. Run that same game you've posted the screenshot from, Zoom into your weapon's sight, and move the camera around between FSR quality mode and DLSS performance mode on a large 4K screen and tell me what you see.

 

But, we could agree to disagree since I think there has been a lot of professional comparisons done on this with conclusive evidence.

 

43 minutes ago, starsmine said:

The current itteration of FSR Super resolution looks no worse the DLSS super resolution

C'mon man.

 

I mean at the very least I don't think my personal experience reflects that in anyway. But you're entitled to your opinion.

[Bagzie]

8 hours ago, Jon-Slow said:

I don't think you can judge upscaling and AA quality by relying on image screenshots or even compressed videos, I feel like we've stablished that a long time ago. Run that same game you've posted the screenshot from, Zoom into your weapon's sight, and move the camera around between FSR quality mode and DLSS performance mode on a large 4K screen and tell me what you see.

 

But, we could agree to disagree since I think there has been a lot of professional comparisons done on this with conclusive evidence.

 

C'mon man.

 

I mean at the very least I don't think my personal experience reflects that in anyway. But you're entitled to your opinion.

The higher up the resolution you go the less likely to notice upscaling in Avatar atleast.

 

If you are sitting 10 inches from your 48 inch then sure but for any sane person you are on a couch 4-5 feet away.

 

I'm very sensitive to shimmering I use XESS in some games because of it but they really did do a great job in Avatar with fsr.

 

The problem is your wording though quite subtle was definately a strongly biased approach to giving advice.

 

You have professional technical tubers with years of testing recommended the 7900XT for 4k never mind the 7900XTX.

 

 

 

[freeagent]

10 hours ago, Bagzie said:

Also just because you had a subtle dig at AMD doesn't mean it's any less of a dig , Both amd and nvidia have there place as suitable options the difference is I've recommended nvidia in the past but you definately have that green blood running through your veins.

Is this directed at me?

 

Yeah I wont buy an AMD card right now, I would rather run Nvidia.

[Bagzie]

33 minutes ago, freeagent said:

Is this directed at me?

 

Yeah I wont buy an AMD card right now, I would rather run Nvidia.

I have no problem with that opinion and there's use cases where a 4070ti makes sense but would you agree the 7900XTX is not a 4k gpu? 

 

Or let me put it another way would you see someone using a 7900XTX with a 4k display and think "Oh wow bet that's rough".

[JonS77]

1 hour ago, Bagzie said:

The problem is your wording though quite subtle was definately a strongly biased approach to giving advice.

 

First let's start by undestanding that what I said was not advice, but personal opinion and what I've learned myself through both personal examination and tests as well as observing other people's opinions. OP didn't ask what card to buy, I didn't say what card he should buy.

 

My personal opinion seems to be something you seem to have a problem with. I wouldn't get myself a 7900XTX for a good 4K experience considering the price, and what is available at the same price range, and so I don't recommend it to anyone who asks me that question; but I will explain why, as I have extensively. But it seems like there is a disconnect here with what a personal opinion is or if the validity of someone's argument can be questioned if they spell the word "rogue" incorrectly.

 

1 hour ago, Bagzie said:

You have professional technical tubers with years of testing recommended the 7900XT for 4k never mind the 7900XTX.

I don't know who, and in what context. Again, personal opinion. I don't think I would like to play with FSR, and with the 2 latest AAA releases I can't hit 60fps in one and 40fps in the other(Avatar FOP), Same with Robocop Rogue City, Immortals of Aveum , and a bunch of other games that I probably haven't tested.

 

1 hour ago, Bagzie said:

The higher up the resolution you go the less likely to notice upscaling in Avatar atleast.

 

If you are sitting 10 inches from your 48 inch then sure but for any sane person you are on a couch 4-5 feet away.

Again, I can't believe I have to keep saying this, but personal opinion.

 

In Avatar FOP, if you get my 48" oled and zoom in your sight and move your camera and compare FSR with DLSS you can see the worst of it. But it's all over the place with the vegetation, ropes, strings, sharp edges of objects, transparent effects,... Everything falls apart in movement. DLSS has all of that figured out and you will never understand what I'm saying if you're not looking at it with your own eyes.

 

 DLSS 4K performance mode in Avatar FOP, to me, looks to have temporal stability in motion while FSR in quality mode does not. This is true with any game I've tried this year. You may disagree if all you've seen are youtube videos and screenshots but you're still entitled to your own opinion.

 

 

And Again, this is sooooo weird that you're going up and down all the way here and expecting everyone to share your opinion, or the opinion of your favourit "techtuber" on what they should think and expect. I consider the 7900XTX a 4K card with compromise specifically due to its much weaker RT performance and image reconstruction tech, or the 7900xt. I won't be expecting to continue this conversation since all you are interested in is a misunderstand of what a personal opinion is.